State v. Johnson ( 2012 )

THIS OPINION HAS NO PRECEDENTIAL VALUE.  IT SHOULD NOT BE CITED OR RELIED ON AS PRECEDENT IN ANY PROCEEDING EXCEPT AS PROVIDED BY RULE 268(d)(2), SCACR.

THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA
In The Court of Appeals

The State, Respondent,

v.

David Mario Johnson, Appellant.

---

Appeal From Anderson County
R. Lawton McIntosh, Circuit Court Judge

---

Unpublished Opinion No. 2012-UP-264    
Submitted March 1, 2012 – Filed May 2, 2012

---

AFFIRMED

---

Appellate Defender Elizabeth A. Franklin-Best, of Columbia, for Appellant.

Attorney General Alan Wilson, Chief Deputy Attorney General John W. McIntosh, Assistant Deputy Attorney General Salley W. Elliott, and Assistant Attorney General William M. Blitch, Jr., all of Columbia; and Solicitor Christina T. Adams, of Anderson, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM: David Mario Johnson appeals his convictions for trafficking in cocaine and possession of marijuana, arguing the trial court erred in admitting his statement into evidence.  Specifically, Johnson avers the police procured his statement through a promise of leniency. We affirm[1] pursuant to Rule 220(b)(1), SCACR, and the following authorities: State v. Saltz, 346 S.C. 114, 136, 551 S.E.2d 240, 252 (2001) ("When reviewing a trial court's ruling concerning voluntariness, this [court] does not reevaluate the facts based on its own view of the preponderance of the evidence, but simply determines whether the trial court's ruling is supported by any evidence."); United States v. Mashburn, 406 F.3d 303, 309-10 (4th Cir. 2005) (finding law enforcement officer's statement that defendant could only help himself by providing assistance to law enforcement did not constitute a promise of leniency).       

AFFIRMED.

FEW, C.J., and HUFF and SHORT, JJ., concur.

---

[1] We decide this case without oral argument pursuant to Rule 215, SCACR.